Looks great against bums and C -level fighters but can never really seem to win the big one against good competition but keeps getting opportunities for reasons no one understands.
Yeah but Cotto is much more technical than Thurman and a more focus, well composed fighter.
I think he might have stopped him.
I'd predict a Cotto stoppage as well (body shot), but Thurman has enough power/speed and counter-punching ability to make it interesting. I think the fight would look similar to Thurman/Chaves or Cotto/Judah: tit for tat until somebody gets stopped.
Danny was a good fighter at 140. At 147 he isn't quite as good. Simple as that really. He has 3 decision losses to 3 of the top 5 guys in the division. In what may be the most top heavy division in boxing. I thought he was close in the Thurman fight as well - only because Thurman took quite a few rounds off towards the end though.
Comparing him to Cotto flatters Danny quite a bit however.
Nope, even Angel straight up admitted it was a clear loss.
That's when you know it was real because Angel NEVER accepted losses until Spence.
Every time you post, I just remember how much you absolutely embarrassed yourself with your Loma-Lopez prediction.
Cotto/Thurman would've been a tremendous fight.
Yeah but Cotto is much more technical than Thurman and a more focus, well composed fighter.
I think he might have stopped him.
I was just thinking in another thread that this is a great comparison. Very similar but i think Garcia is a little better defensively and Cotto might have been a bit more heavy handed
Why do you watch boxing when you think so much of it is fake, fixed and arranged in advance???? I know pro wrestling is fake so I don't watch it. WPro boxing is real so I watch it and enjoy it. It is so easy for you to say whenever a boxer you dislike such as Spence wins a good fight to say the fight was fixed and he could not possibly lose.:bottle::bottle::bottle:
Miguel Cotto would destroy Danny Garcia.
yes they both both became high priced hired patsies at the end of their careers, to serve and feed the record of the younger annointed franchises.
Why do you watch boxing when you think so much of it is fake, fixed and arranged in advance???? I know pro wrestling is fake so I don't watch it. WPro boxing is real so I watch it and enjoy it. It is so easy for you to say whenever a boxer you dislike such as Spence wins a good fight to say the fight was fixed and he could not possibly lose.:bottle::bottle::bottle:
yes they both both became high priced hired patsies at the end of their careers, to serve and feed the record of the younger annointed franchises.Neither Cotto or Garcia ever lost a fight on purpose. That is just your strange fantasy that you work overtime pushing on this forum. When you don;t like a boxer You claim his fights were fixed. You never say the boxers you like such as Crawford ever had any fights fixed for them. Fixed fights are very rare and usually easy to spot.
Looks great against bums and C -level fighters but can never really seem to win the big one against good competition but keeps getting opportunities for reasons no one understands.
No......
He knocked out Khan and beat the boogeyman of 140 at the time Lucas Mattysee
Plus Cotto was a great fighter till he was assaulted in the ring with Plaster
Looks great against bums and C -level fighters but can never really seem to win the big one against good competition but keeps getting opportunities for reasons no one understands.Yep, that is true. But he put up a good fight against Thurman and Porter. Spence won by a mile and made it clear Garcia is not in the same class as Crawford or Spence. The Garcia family may claim poor Danny got robbed again.
Looks great against bums and C -level fighters but can never really seem to win the big one against good competition but keeps getting opportunities for reasons no one understands.
Cotto would have beaten Porter and Thurman for sure IMO and I would favor him vs Spence too...